On Monday, Brady promised, if elected, to veto the idea “because I realize the consequences associated with the legislation.” Asked what those consequences were, Brady said, “The people of Illinois don’t want it.”

So, after much thought and the realization of how unpopular it was, Brady wouldn’t sign his own bill.

Trouble is, Brady voted against the original law that banned the mass animal killings not once but twice.

The law was a product of negotiations between the Farm Bureau and the Humane Society. It wasn’t an easy process by any means. The talks lasted two long years, and they were often difficult.

Quinn said the Brady euthanasia legislation goes directly to the senator’s overall judgment.

“He withdrew it because everybody in Illinois thought it was one of the worst ideas ever submitted to the Illinois General Assembly, and I think he ought to be accountable for it,” Quinn said. “What kind of nonsense was he thinking when he even submitted the bill?”

Not only that, what was he thinking when he twice voted against the original moratorium back in 2009?

* Keep in mind, Brady’s bill was introduced just two days after the February primary. This is what I told subscribers back in late February…

Obviously, Brady is not yet thinking like a statewide candidate. For crying out loud, you can’t introduce a bill to help out your local puppy gas chamber when you’re trying to be governor. I mean, seriously, what kind of thought process concocts an idea like that?

Brady shouldn’t be let off the hook so easily on this thing. He ought to be held accountable not only for his incredibly goofy bill, but for his two votes against the original moratorium.

Now, is this the most important issue in the state? Hardly. But Brady’s legislation sure was the stupidest bill of the year. By far. That’s really saying something, and that alone makes it an issue.

The four candidates at the top of the ticket have reached almost 425,000 people via the Internet–enough to populate Illinois’ three biggest cities outside of Chicago. Kirk’s video viewers alone would constitute Illinois’ second biggest city; he and Quinn have substantial leads on their opponents in terms of Internet viewership.

It is a large market to tap into and one that professor Max Dawson of Northwestern University’s School of Communication says could revolutionize the output of campaign press.

“This new platform allows for more targeted messaging, more immediate messaging and it allows messages to be customized to an audience,” he said “Uploading is free, less costly allow candid to blanket the public with the platform and reach out to young people.”

The targeted messaging allows candidates to respond to the news of the day quickly or highlight nuances of the campaign that may not seem important enough for statewide airtime. When, for example, legendary Bears Coach and self-described conservative Mike Ditka endorsed Gov. Quinn, the campaign released the announcement on Youtube.

No surprise, Gov. Pat Quinn’s puppy killer video is by far his top-watched YouTube effort at 20,681 views. Bill Brady’s most-viewed YouTube video is an ad from the primary. It was called “Brady Plan” and it has received 7,074 views.

Mark Kirk’s most-watched video, at 9,754 views, is his TV ad called “Risky.” Alexi Giannoulias’ top video has 13,155 views. It’s called “On and On,” a web vid about Kirk’s military embellishments.

None of these are truly “viral” videos. But Quinn’s puppy vid is probably the closest thing we have to that because it is the only one which has generated any sort of buzz and “mainstream” media coverage. ABC7 was one of the outlets that covered the story last night. The Guardian did a piece on it last week.

I think the 425 is a low number because lots of times, a blog like this will see it, repost it, or the suntimes will repost it or the tv stations will play it on air. It’s also a misleading number because lots of people from outside the state watch them and in some cases multiple times. I think the real value in them is when they turn into media picked up and played by msm and to communicate with supporters.

Agreed it’s higher now that an election is going on. But I mean compared to 08 and 06 campaign seasons. It’s just an unscientific recollection of how many comments you got in previous election years compared to now.

“Puppy gas chamber” is just plain inflamatory. We are talking about animal control facilities, people. They euthanize animals. We all know it happens. The bill authorized veterinarians to use their best judgement in how to euthanize the animals. Move on people, this is getting silly.

So it has come down to puppy killing. Our never ending search for rock bottom has finally ended. This state has real issues that need to be dealt with, and a desperate candidate (Pat Quinn) is chumming the water with a puppy gassing vote. I realize the vote was stupid on Brady’s part, but lets move on.

As has been said here many times, perception rules. Brady can be perceived as either being uncaring of puppies or pandering to a constituent. Either way it makes him look bad. Sausage making can look ugly enough without the whole gassing puppy element. Brady will have to deal with this from here on out - PQ ain’t got nothin’ else.

The gas chamber bill Brady filed was horrific, but what is more concerning is that he just took a constituent at his word that it was a good bill. He did not check with staff, or any of the parties involved. What kind of people and ideas will he push for if elected governor. This is so much more than a bad bill, its a sign of bad judgment. I will end with a quote that Brady should take to heart, , Gandhi said “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

Nobody,even Brady himself, has ever claimed that he was the brightest bulb in the chandelier. If he was running against any other prominent Dem, with the possible exception of Rod and Todd, he’d be down by 20.
Even now, he may blow it against the worst democratic candidate in the history of Illinois politics.
Talk about a race to the bottom! I may go visit Will in Oklahoma on election day.

I agree with Pundeete. We’ve got a state in a financial mess, rated among the lowest in the nation on jobs and several other issues, Governors in jail and going there, and the only “hot issue” Quinn can find is how we euthanize unwanted animals? C’mon folks, get with the important issues, not the touchy feely stuff. Sheeesh.

(1) I’m a dog owner and pet lover; my wife and I even used to volunteer at our local animal shelter. But I understand that sometimes animals have to be put down, unpleasant as it may be. The “gas chamber” method does seem cruel, but I don’t see how it becomes any more cruel when you use it on multiple animals at a time. So, my question is, has anyone asked Quinn if he would support completely outlawing the use of these chambers altogether? If he does support such an outright ban, why didn’t he make a bigger push for it during session (after all, it seems to be an important enough issue for the campaign); and if he doesn’t, then what is the difference between 1 dog and 10 at a time? Either put up or shut up, Governor.

(2) Brady voted against the moratorium and sponsored a bill at the urging of a local constituent. Now he’s “backed away” from that stance. Okay – so, what? Legislators take hundreds of votes and introduce dozens of bills every year. Sometimes they do so even when they aren’t particularly passionate about the subject. Then, sometimes politics comes along and changes their mind when he sees that a significant number of people are passionate about it. It’s not like Brady flip-flopped on a deeply-held, core believe that he’s campaigned on in the past (ahem, Dick Durban and abortion, ahem). He changed his mind about a veterinary procedure. Big freakin’ deal!

Is there a common philosophy or theme to Brady’s votes in the state senate? Was he easily swayed by local interests in his district that lobbied him on legislation? Or did he think through his votes and weigh different sides to the issues? Were these particular votes outliers or do they represent a pattern?

If anyone can refer me to any media summary accounts or analysis of Brady’s overall voting record I would appreciate it. Quinn’s team should be putting the full picture in front of us instead of just asking us “Who is this guy?”. Hell if I know, but I guess Quinn’s ads do inspire many to ask themselves the same question.

Spare me the Gandhi quotes. As was said above, the bill authorized veterinarians to use their best judgment in how to euthanize the animals. Bill Brady is not Micheal Vick, and the “moral progress” of the nation shouldn’t be judged off 1 bill in the Illinois state Senate. Breath taking quote, but lets stop with the Faye Ray impersonations.

The farm bureau signed off because all the stuff they hated from the original bill was pulled out including a total ban on gassing, bolts to the head, etc. The farm bureau negotiated the thing down to next to nothing and agreed. They probably figured they had to give Fritchey and Steans something and this was next to nothing. The farm bureau doesn’t care about gassing cats and dogs.

grand old partisan,
Per the Animal Law Coalition, the following states DO NOT or NO LONGER allow the use of carbon monoxide gas chambers: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

this issue shows the heart, or lack of heart, of Brady. putting more than one animal in a box, where they will thrash around, claw each other, as they are gassed to death, is horrific. if you care at all about your pet, this is unthinkable. if you have had an animal that had to be helped to death, you know that humane care to the end is the only way. the cavalier approach of Brady, the votes from the past, this is indicative of his heart. which is empty.

VoterUSA, thanks for the info. But it doesn’t really address my point. I admitted that the practice seems cruel, which is probably why those other states have banned it. But I fail to see how it becomes MORE cruel to use it on more than one animal at a time. Maybe it becomes more horrific in the eyes of those who are passionate about it, but it does not become any more cruel to the animal(s). My point is that unless Quinn is going to make a push to outlaw the practice all-together, as those other states have done, he should stop pretending that it’s a big deal that Brady wanted to make it more efficient and economical.

Well, when you pack a bunch of animals into a tiny closed space, they generally don’t get along very well. So they’re panicked, fighting eachother, etc. Additionally, when there are multiple animals, it can take longer for them to die since the environment inside can’t be as evenly controlled. So yeah, I find it more cruel that they have a bunch of panicked animals clawing and biting each other while they die more slowly, do you?

The cruelty of multiple gassings is that the animals don’t die immediately. They start to asphyxiate and panic, resulting in the animals attacking each other.

This is utterly inhumane. Things Brady has said about that he would have made bigger and deeper cuts in the Department of Human Services than Quinn did says a lot about his lack of compassion for others.

Brady’s comments on the issue don’t help him, but what does Pat Quinn suggest we do with unwanted animals.

Try living in a small community that can barely afford an animal control officer. We can’t afford Quinn’s idealistic views. I am the last person who wants to see an animal treated cruely. But we when Pat Quinn is cutting funding for eduction and threatens to up costs at veterans homes, something has to give.

It is fundemental issue of this election. Who will make the tough decision to get us back on track? Pat Quinn will risk putting WWII and Korean War veterans in the streets to ensure humane treatment of dogs. Really? You have tou start telling people no. If we keep spending 13 billion a year more than we have, the state government will collapse! then how will the dogs be treated?

It is hard to describe how unimportant this issue is to me in comparison to the incredibly serious financial catastrophe Illinois is facing. Honestly I don’t even know what the issue is. We support the gassing of one “puppy” (apparently only puppies and kitties get gassed, never suffering dogs or diseased cats or anything that isn’t adorable) but not the gassing of more then one? Are we going to take the time out from falling into a financial, educational, and services sinkhole to discuss the best way to end the life of a suffering animal? (er…I mean “puppy”, of course, just so Quinn can maximize his illogical appeal to raw emotion)

Look, I don’t want puppies to get gassed, or put down, or anything else. I want them to stay adorable and healthy and immortal. But I wouldn’t base a run for office on that desire, and I wouldn’t belittle the public discourse with such a blatant attempt to blind logic with emotion. This is NOT an issue, and it only makes Quinn look inept as he tries any trick, no matter how low, to take attention off how he has handled our state.

Rich, your answer to the above is essentially that it’s an issue just because it was supposedly so politically foolish. Perhaps, but only because reporters let Quinn get away with it–making it a self-fulfilling prophecy FROM reporters. This carries no water with me whatsoever.

STL & Aldyth – Brady’s bill specifically mandated that the chamber be subdivided so that the animals could not attack each other – but don’t let the details get in the way or anything. Now, if it is a fact that the animals die more slowly, then, that might be another matter. But, still, now we’re talking about a sliding scale of degrees (what is the exact rate of asphyxiation needed for it to be considered “humane?”). And that hardly rises to the level of outrage that Quinn is shamelessly trying to stoke with his video.

I have defended Brady on this issue in the past, but the truth is, like many of you, I didn’t understand it. So I did some light research today.

Jaded, first, I agree with your assessment of the Farm Bureau’s actions. They weren’t necessarily advocates of the bill, but it had reached a point where they felt comfortable signing off on it.

Now, as to the real guts of the issue. Everyone has assumed that this is an awful, abusive bill largely because the national spokesperson for the Humane Society stated that mass euthanasia by gas could cause a minute or two more of suffering for animals. Interestingly, mass euthanasia is not listed anywhere on the Humane Society’s webpage as an advocacy issue (that I could find, anyway). I seem to recall, though, in some statement or another, that the Humane Society supports euthanasia by lethal injection as the MOST, and only truly humane manner of putting an animal to sleep. And yet, I don’t see those accusing Brady of being a puppy killer out there on the streets protesting all euthanasia by gas, which currently takes place on a daily basis.

More interesting is the fact that the American Veterinary Medical Association disagrees with the Humane Society spokesperson. Their guidelines state that “Carbon monoxide used for individual animal OR MASS euthanasia is acceptable for dogs, cats, and other small mammals, provided that commercially compressed CO is used” and other guidelines and safe practices are followed. Site: http://www.avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf.

This is clearly NOT a cut-and-dry issue, and I don’t find it at all difficult to believe that Brady could, upon hearing additional information from a reliable source (i.e., a constituent in the veterinary medical profession), change his stance on the issue. I also don’t see how this suggests any shadiness or backroom dealings. It is a disputed and confusing issue - - it would seem appropriate to consult constituents affected by it!

Look, I don’t pretend to be an expert here, but the truth of the matter is that there are few who are. Humane euthanasia, in general, appears to be a highly nuanced and tricky subject.

However, I find it hard to believe that the intelligent people here truly believe this is THE issue that we, as concerned Illinois citizens, should focus on in this election. I believe the real crime here is Quinn’s. Like the tax issue, I think that this euthanasia issue is - not silly, because I do care about it as an animal lover and longtime Humane Society foster - but a distraction. We are facing dire times here in Illinois, and now is not the time to debate the nuances of euthanasia or to make false accusations about income taxes. Any intelligent person with a computer can find out more about both of these issues and will likely come out believing that they are relatively insignificant. Sure, they can be made to sound bad, but at their essence, they’re really not important.

It makes me angry that Quinn is trying to take advantage of voter ignorance and laziness by taking non-issues and spinning and distorting them into accusations for a 30 second commercial. It makes me upset that Quinn supporters intelligent enough to comprehend the insignificance of these issues are still making political hay by pushing them on the voting public.

Regarding the euthanasia issue - if the Vet Med Association and the Humane Society disagree on it, it clearly deserves more debate than a 30 second commercial with angry pet owners calling Brady a puppy killer. Please, people, let’s not be the idiots some of these politicians take us for.

gop-you’ve been on this blog long enough to know stl does not allow facts to matter except when they support his position. (will await the usual name calling now). on the farm, we did not even bother with animal control. strays were shot and buried. not pleasant, but necessary as they caused big problem with livestock, not to mention family safety.

Sorry - one more final point. The AVMA guidelines also say that research does not indicate that dogs/cats suffer for 1 or two whole minutes. Here is the relevant info, and if you read a little higher up on the page (page 13 of that link that I provided), you can see they are discussing mass euthanasia: “In a study evaluating the physiologic and behavioral characteristics of dogs exposed to 6% CO in air, Chalifoux and Dallaire95 could not determine the precise time of loss of consciousness. Electroencephalographic recordings revealed 20 to 25 seconds of abnormal cortical function prior to loss of consciousness. It was during this period that the dogs became agitated and vocalized. It is not known whether animals experience distress; however, humans in this phase reportedly are not distressed.”

One of the reasons it took “two long years” to negotiate the bill was because of the tactics chosen by the lobbyist for the Humane Society. Mike Madigan’s son in law tried to strong arm the bill through without doing much negotiating.

Okay, on that last point, I’ve got to weigh in. I made countless efforts to get the interested parties to clearly stake out what their issues and concerns were in order to try to negotiate a workable compromise. My efforts were often met with double-talk and a complete lack of desire to reach any common ground.

So people are free to take issue with the substance of the bill, (as Chief Sponsor, my bias is clear), but don’t try to cloud the issue with falsehoods about the process.

===Brady won’t discuss the specifics of his budget plan and won’t get into a debate on his social stands==

Quinn was LT Gov for 6 years and Gov for 2. Still has no specific budget plan. He has no plan for the budget year we are operating under. If the AG’s dad hadn’t written the budget she would file a lawsuit because the Quinn-Madigan budget violates the constitution. You want Brady’s plan for 2011 and 2012, but won’t demand Pat Quinn tell you who is getting paid in November of 2010. Nice analysis.

Quinn spent a day giving a beagle a tour of the governor’s mansion but can’t pass a balanced bugets. Brady conceeds, Quinn is better for dogs than he is. Unfortunately, dogs don’t vote or pay taxes. Quinn wants to talk about dogs because it is the only issue he can beat Brady on. Maybe pat can start giving a dog to each prisoner he lets out early.

FWIW: I am also a lifetime dog owner and pet lover. I’ve donated time and money to pet causes. That said, this is a clear Emotion not Logic topic. In a relatively small county of which I am aware, the additional cost of contracting a vet to euthanize animals vs. using the gas chamber amounts to several thousand dollars per year. That comes from additional taxes. This legislation puts an additional financial burden on taxpayers and municipal entities across the state. Is it more humane? Maybe. Maybe not. They do die faster; but they also get stressed about getting stuck by the needle and added handling. Is the end result any different? No. The big questions should be: is that where we want to be forced to allocate scarce resources and shouldn’t each entity be allowed to allocate their limited funds to what they perceive as their priority areas? In my opinion, that is the reality of this issue and that is how Brady should be framing Quinn’s attacks. But we all know many people tend to respond most to emotion and not logic.

I suspect: those other states all outlaw it because the Humane Society has had unwarranted influence in those states too; the legislation wasn’t been brought about due to poor judgment by vets (most became vets because they love animals); and the Farm Bureau somewhat agreed to least painful realistic scenario. My perception is that the County Boards with the legal / financial responsibility for animal control should have played a much more active role in crafting legislation to ensure it remained legal.

STL - The dogs we are talking about here have lived wretched existences. The most ‘humane’ thing would be to try and find them a loving home that can adequately care for them for the rest of their natural lives. In some sad cases, of course, the next most ‘humane’ thing you can do is put them down. Beyond that, it’s a matter of degree. Now, I can tell you as a former shelter volunteer that most of the dogs in question would get “panicky and distressed” if you tried to bath, pet or even just feed them, too, so I don’t think that’s the best barometer for what is humane treatment. You are saying that being panicky and distressed in a subdivided gas chamber is less humane than having a nice big gas chamber all to yourself (which I’m sure is a very peaceful and relaxing experience for the poor pups). Who knows - maybe it is. But to me that seems like saying its more humane to beat someone with a wooden bat than an aluminum one. It just doesn’t make enough difference to get really worked up about.

gop - If you want to write a book about how humane this is, be my guest. I don’t think many people will buy it. Its widely agreed that its less humane, so Brady either doesn’t care, or he will do anything a donor tells him. There aren’t any more excuses.

That’s right STL. The American Veternary Medical Association is an unimportant, fringe group whose opinion on this matter is completely irrelevant. Everyone else (at least, everyone whose opinions are worth considering) agrees with you.

Just to second gop, the reality is that few of the animals at animal shelters are healthy, well adapted animals. Considering the long term costs and resuults, most people would be far better off purchasing a dog from a reputable breeder (not a puppy mill) than adopting one from a shelter.

I think the puppy bill is important because it shows Brady’s total indifference to the consequences of his actions. In the same way he coldly pushes for across the board cuts without thinking of the possible harm to fragile but necessary programs.

STL - I haven’t been trying to convince you to support the bill; I’ve just been trying to make the case that it isn’t the outrageous affront to animal rights that you make it out to be. It was supported by the AVMA, a professional association rooted in science (I thought liberals like science).

Lawyerlady submitted a reasonable post to this subject. I totally agree.

For those that say this is an issue because it goes to Brady’s judgement — please. That is the best you got?

This is an issue that is emotional and could pull alot of votes for PQ. If so, that is a shame. When this state is faced with many more serious issues we are talking about killing puppies.

If you want to discuss the candidates poor judgement. Why not bring up Quinn’s many endorsements of Rod Blagojevich. Remember, he was quoted as saying that he was honest and always try’s to do the right thing. That is what I call poor judgement!

I am not complaining. And I do agree that it is a huge distraction from some very important issues. I also agree that we are not hearing much regarding real solutions and that is disappointing.

But remember this is Illinois that we are talking about. I don’t see anyone getting overly excited about any of the candidates and most voters lump all politicians in the same category.

Take the US Senate race for example. Kirk vs Alexi, these 2 guys are the best either party could come up with. Really? A mob banker vs a serial liar. Very sad.

So in the governor race the pundits “complain” because the candidates don’t put forth concrete solutions. Well here is an assessment on that subject. Quinn doesn’t have any solutions. He has been in office for over a year and has demonstrated his incompetence on a daily basis. Then we have Brady. He won’t tell us what he will do because we all know why. There are no soultions that won’t cause considerable pain to a lot of peoiple and some of them might actually vote. So his strategy of say little and don’t screw it up may win this election. But again these 2 are the best the parties can come up with?

Rich Whitney is by far the brightest most articulate candiate out there. His problem is that his ideas are 2 far out for the mainstream in 2010.

So take your pick. Hold your nose if you must. But please vote for the least objectionable cndidate out there. I did……..

Without question, this ‘puppy killer’ ad theme is the most insulting, offensive, ignorant, and self-demeaning initiative that Illinois Democrats have pulled since I’ve been here (only since 1982). I don’t think it will have any effect. But the people who are putting it forth as a way of supporting the defective candidacy of Pat Quinn are the same people who caused the election, twice, of the moral leper who ran the State until the U.S. Justice Department (not any State authority) removed their hero. Pathetic.

For the past two gubernatorial elections, we allowed a future felon to call the shots and win our votes. Not because he had something to say, but that he was both charming and capable of proving that Topinka polkaed with George Ryan.

Now we are in a very bad situation. Our issues are huge. There is no easy way out of this fiasco. So, what does the current governor do?

He starts talking about how his opponent doesn’t love puppies as much as he does.

He tells us how his opponent didn’t pay on unowed taxes.

He tells us how conservatives like is opponent are full of hate.

He smears everyone around him.

I mean, come on! Pat Quinn has nothing to brag about, but at least make something up. If you are going to lie, at least lie about yourself. Stretch the truth. Don’t tell us that if Brady is elected, rape victims will be forced to give birth to aliens from Indiana. Don’t tell us that as he forces teens to destroy their lives, he first sends the police to enslave their pets and euthanize them. Don’t tell us that before he shuts down our public schools and forces our children to learn from 1940 home school textbooks, Brady will demand we all live in substandard housing.

There has to be a limit. If Governor Quinn has nothing nice to say about himself, at least be decent enough to shut up about the other guy.

Our current situation is bleak. Don’t try to get elected by claiming that if Brady is elected it will get bleaker. That isn’t much of a reason to vote for Pat Quinn. That demonstrates a complete inability to justify remaining in office, frankly.